DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on April 6, 2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the Chinese application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, (a) the “semi-square” and “V-shaped structure”, as in claim 4, and (b) the iron plates, wooden plates and iron wires, as in claim 5, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. With respect to (a), it is noted that since claim 1 recites that the openings, recesses, etc., have “the same shape” (see line 8 of claim 1) as the posts, the figures must also show the same shape of the posts.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Abstract
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, (a) “The present invention relates to the technical field of shelves, in particular to a” in lines 1-2, which should be changed to –A--, and
(b) “In the present invention,” in line 5, which should be deleted.
Further, applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure. A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art, such as the last sentence, which should be deleted.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Title
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. See Section 112 rejections, advanced below, pertaining to “high-stability” and “easy”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The phrase “high-stability” as in line 1 of each of claims 1-5 is a relative phrase which renders the claim indefinite. This phrase is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. This rejection is also applicable to the term “easy”, as in line 1 of each of claims 1-5.
The language of claim 1 blurs the metes and bounds of the claim, thereby making it unclear exactly how many elements are being claimed. In particular, “at least one group of laminate board”, in line 2, where “group” is plural, yet undefined, and “board” is singular. Similarly, “four groups of upright posts”, in line 3, where it appears that four posts are shown, but not four “groups”. Furthermore, “each edge side of the laminate board” (see line 5), where “each” is plural and “board” is singular. Furthermore, note “two adjacent groups of laminate board” in line 7, and “board” in claim 5.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are: between the upright posts and the laminate board, as in line 3. In particular, based on the Section 112 rejections, advanced above, it is unclear how many posts and boards are being claimed and thus such cannot be properly related to one another. Similarly, note “two adjacent groups of laminate board” in line 7 in claim 1.
Use of the term “matrix” in claim 1 (see line 4), appears to be improper, since a rectangle, as see in Figure 1, is not considered to define a matrix.
Use of the term “can” in line 7 of claim 1 blurs the metes and bounds of the claim making it unclear whether the proceeding limitation is being positively required in the claim.
It is unclear what is meant by “end faces” in line 2 and 3 of claim 2, thereby making the scope and structural relationship of the claim unclear.
The language of claim 3 renders the claim indefinite, since it unclear what is meant by the term “figures” in lines 2 and 3. In particular, a “figure” cannot reasonably define a claimed structure or element.
Claim 5 is rendered indefinite since it is unclear whether the limitation “formed by” is intended to a method step in an apparatus claim. Further, it is unclear how the structure of the “iron plates wooden plates, or iron wires” is formed since claim 1 sets forth that the edge sides are “bent”. It is noted that no structure in the figures can be considered to reasonably construe any of the elements recited in claim 5.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 6,915,915 (Nakajima ‘915).
With respect to claim 1, Nakajima ‘915 discloses a high-stability shelf for easy connection (see Figure 1), comprising at least one group of laminate board (1); and four groups of upright posts (at 4 – see Figure 1) distributed on two edge sides (i.e., where the corners are formed are considered to define the side edges) of the laminate board (1) in a matrix manner (i.e., four), wherein each edge side of the laminate board (1) is bent to form a bend (unnumbered - between each adjacent numeral 2 in Figure 2), recesses (at 3) spaced apart from each other are provided on the two edge sides of the laminate board (1), the recesses (3) between two adjacent groups (not shown – but another element 1 would be placed further down 4) of laminate boards (1) can form accommodating openings having the same shape (see Figure 1) as the upright posts (4), and fasteners (10, 11, 7) for fixing the upright posts (4) are provided on inner sides (see Figure 1) of the recesses (3); with respect to claim 2, wherein the fasteners are bolts (at 7 – see Figure 1), positioning holes (at 8) are provided on end faces of the bends (see Figure 1), and threaded holes (9) fixed to the bolts (7) are symmetrically provided on end faces of the upright posts (4); with respect to claim 3, wherein cross-sections of the upright posts (4) are axisymmetric figures, and cross-sections of the recesses (3) are half (see Figure 1, where the shape of 3 is considered to be half of 4, based on the shape as in Figure 5) of the axisymmetric figures; and with respect to claim 4 wherein the cross-sections of the recesses (5) are semicircular.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakajima ‘915, alone.
Nakajima ‘915 discloses the shelf as advanced above, whereby the laminate board (1) is a slab.
The claim differs from Nakajima ‘915 in requiring the laminate board (1) to be formed by welding iron plates, wooden plates or iron wires.
Although not disclosed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, that the laminate board, as shown in Nakajima ‘915, could be formed in any of the recited ways, thereby increasing ease in economy and manufacture, and thus creating no new or unexpected results.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER E. NOVOSAD whose telephone number is (571) 272-6832. The examiner can normally be reached generally Monday through Thursday, 8am to 6:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice .
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jonathan Liu can be reached at 571-272-8227. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov . Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If
you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Jennifer E. Novosad/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631
August 4, 2025